"Source First" or move that Pre

Posted by: Aric on 22 October 2015

I've combed through past threads and the answer seems to depend - frequently - on the actual components one has and intends to move onto. System matching then being the operative word.

Let me be clear at the outset, that this is a contemplated move from current system: CD5XS/CB HICAP/Powerline + NAC N-172 (all Fraimed) into Active ATC's; to a shakeup at Preamp that I would not be able to demo; however, the purchase would be second hand and the sale of my current Pre (172) would likely be a net gain (weirdly).

So the contemplation is ditching the 172, whose streamer feature I'm just not using and DAC very seldom. In other words, I'm really only interested in using it just as a preamp.

Based on space and current shelf limitations, I'm considering moving to a nice, s/h 202, but I would have to move the HICAP off the CD5XS to power the 202. Adding a NAPSC would also be done (this just placed on the floor, as far from the Fraim as possible).

My profile has more details on my system, but what do you think, is a slight downgrade at source justified for a better pre? I also listen to vinyl (about 30-40% of the time).

Posted on: 22 October 2015 by The Strat (Fender)

A NAC 202 would transform your system. I'd doubt your CD5XS would suffer from moving your the HC to power the 202 and would be completely out weighed from the overall system gain. Your vinyl replay would be transformed as well.

Good luck.

Posted on: 22 October 2015 by Christopher_M

Interesting Aric. I wonder if you might be better off with a CD5XS, FCXS and Nac152XS? This level of components is at least all level.

Best, Chris

Posted on: 22 October 2015 by Aric

Chris,

Maybe so, but in a couple of years I see a CDX2 or something akin at the front. So in my mind, when the time to upgrade strikes, it's normal to end up with a component that perhaps sticks out as being superior to the rest...but then that component type falls to the back of the line as the others move up over time.

While I haven't done the dem, I'm not convinced enough to take the punt that a FC'd 152X is better that my current setup.

Aric

Posted on: 22 October 2015 by Aric

Originally Posted by The Strat (Fender):

Strat,

Do you know the 172 well enough to describe the benefit moving on to the 202, or is it effectively across the board?

Aric

Posted on: 22 October 2015 by Christopher_M

Originally Posted by Aric:

.....in a couple of years I see a CDX2 or something akin at the front.

Ah. It all falls into place now ;-)

Posted on: 23 October 2015 by The Strat (Fender)

Originally Posted by Aric:

Originally Posted by The Strat (Fender):

Strat,

Do you know the 172 well enough to describe the benefit moving on to the 202, or is it effectively across the board?

Aric

Aric,

I've only heard the 172 once with a NAP 200 but know the NAC 202 very well and with a CD5XS is a very musical pairing. I think you can be confident that a dedicated pre-amp like the 202 with a HC is going to comfortably outperform an entry level streamer/pre.

Strat

Posted on: 23 October 2015 by The Strat (Fender)

Should also have said having looked at your profile your TT is definitely deserving of a quality pre. In fact - throwing a giant pebble in the pool - is a 2nd hand 282 out of the question?? Sorry!!!!

Posted on: 23 October 2015 by Aric

Well, I may have mistakenly assumed that the RP6/Exact2/Aria pairing was on the same plane as a 152/172 and anything past that would be lost as the source wasn't good enough.

Regarding the 282 s/h, they just don't come up very often here, and when they do, the price difference between new and used isn't the same market dislocation that I'm currently seeing with the 202. Therefore, I'm being opportunistic in chasing the superior preamp function of the 202 vs the functionality of the 172 (which as it turns out, I'm not really using).

But nice try

Posted on: 23 October 2015 by The Strat (Fender)

Get the 202. A few weeks ago I heard a RP6 with a quite upmarket Transfiguration cartridge and Audioanalogue amp and it sounded really sublime You've also got a really good phono stage so when your stylus needs replacing you could replace it with a Dynavector 10/5 or similar

Go for it!!!

Posted on: 23 October 2015 by naim_nymph

A nice pre-owned 72 would be far more affordable than a 202.

And sound better too : )

Debs

Posted on: 23 October 2015 by The Strat (Fender)

Good suggestion Debs.

Posted on: 24 October 2015 by Twinslaver

A nice 72 with RSL boards, would blow away 282..

at least mine did

Posted on: 24 October 2015 by Aric

How would a 72 compare to a 82 with the rest of my current system? Would you prefer an 82 to a 202?

Posted on: 24 October 2015 by Steve J

Originally Posted by Twinslaver:

A nice 72 with RSL boards, would blow away 282..

at least mine did

Even RSL don't suggest that. The 282 is such a much better amp than the old 82. But if it works for you that's great. The OP should listen to a 282 before deciding on a 72 + RSL boards before parting with his money though.

Posted on: 24 October 2015 by Aric

Originally Posted by Steve J:

Originally Posted by Twinslaver:

A nice 72 with RSL boards, would blow away 282..

at least mine did

Steve,

Did you mean the 282 is a much better amp than the old 82 or 72?

I'm assuming the 82 would trounce my 172 for preamp abilities?

Thanks

Aric

Posted on: 24 October 2015 by Aric

Decided to take a try on a later 82, although it did have a POTS 8 upgrade performed later on (performed in Salisbury along with voltage transformation to US market).

I noticed that the CD5XS w/o the HICAP was slightly smoother, less forward, so moving the HC to the 82 may produce a better balanced sound.

Should find out in the next week.